3 questions for those in Christ.

I have a question. Why do you non Christians hang out in the Christian forums? Just curious......

Gott said:

Because
#1.
I'm going to bed, so I can get up and go to work.
#2.
You have to answer this first.

1. Couldn't God have forgiven mankind without Jesus dying on a cross?

2. Why did God have to have blood?

3. Is there anywhere in scripture that says Christ bore the wrath of God for mankind, and why?

Click to expand...

I believe that I have answered satisfactorily.

originally posted by Islam_mulia

Hope this is relevant to the OP.

1) According to the Bible, who killed Jesus? The Jews, the Romans, or the Father?

Click to expand...

Exactly how is this revelant to the OP? Also, why would you ask this question? What is the significance of it? The Bible tells us why Jesus was killed and its significance to humanity. That is really the key. If you want to make an issue out of the method and by whom, you would be missing the point of His death in the first place.

2) If the bible claimed that Jesus predicted his death and Christians claimed this has been ordained to save the sins of mankind, someone should be tasked to do the job. Should not Judas Ischariot be a hero to fulfill Jesus' ambition?

Click to expand...

Why would he have to be? On what bases does the Bible say that Judas must be the one?

Why was he made the enemy and not the agent of God to help to take away the sins of mankind?

Click to expand...

I do not understand clearly what you are questioning or reasoning. Clarify. Are you referring to Judas? If so, then this goes back to what I said previously.

Why was there no mention of the names of the Romans who planted the nails on Jesus - should they not be honored to have the privelege of banging the nails to the woods?

Click to expand...

That was not the purpose. Also, there is no mention of names of those who killed some of the prophets in the OT. Details of who killed Christ are not needed to explain that Jesus died for our sins.

Your question is rather badly worded or stated out of ignorance. Those who planted the nails in Jesus were not responsible for His death. They were ordered; so, they were acting on behalf of their superiors.

Gott said:

Now LL you know that is the wrong idea to convey to the members on this Forum.

Let's read what the Christian Bible has to Say.

And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:

Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

In Fact LL How many different way's is there to be saved?

Click to expand...

Depends on which of the Remnant of Jews believe unto Jesus before the wrath hits them.

1 Peter 4:7 But the End [teloV] of ALL things is nigh at hand; therefore be sober-minded and watchful in your prayers.

Romans 9:27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, The remnant will be Saved. 28 For He will finish the work and cut [it] short in righteousness, Because the LORD will make a short work upon the Land"

(NKJV) Ezekiel 7:1 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2 "And you, son of man, thus says the Lord GOD to the ground of Israel: 'An end! The End has come upon the four corners of the LAND [Revelation 20]. 3 Now the end [has come] upon you, And I will send My anger against you; I will judge you according to your ways, And I will repay you for all your abominations [Revelation 11].

peaceful soul said:

originally posted by Islam_mulia
Exactly how is this revelant to the OP? Also, why would you ask this question? What is the significance of it? The Bible tells us why Jesus was killed and its significance to humanity. That is really the key. If you want to make an issue out of the method and by whom, you would be missing the point of His death in the first place.

Click to expand...

The OP talks about the 'death' of Jeus on the cross and the shedding of blood to clear the sins of mankind. At least that's what Christians believe. My question was very relevant to the OP. Who, according to your bible, killed Jesus, that enabled the remission of sins? Was it the Jews, the Romnas or the Father himself?

peaceful soul said:

Why would he have to be? On what bases does the Bible say that Judas must be the one?

I do not understand clearly what you are questioning or reasoning. Clarify. Are you referring to Judas? If so, then this goes back to what I said previously.

Click to expand...

The bible narrates the role of Judas in identifying Jesus and led to his arrest, trial and crucifixion. Can I not say that Judas sets the whole process of crucifixion, resurrection and remission of sins. Technically speaking, was Judas not the 'agent of God' in fulfilling this belief?

peaceful soul said:

That was not the purpose. Also, there is no mention of names of those who killed some of the prophets in the OT. Details of who killed Christ are not needed to explain that Jesus died for our sins.

Your question is rather badly worded or stated out of ignorance. Those who planted the nails in Jesus were not responsible for His death. They were ordered; so, they were acting on behalf of their superiors.

Click to expand...

1. Who killed the old prophets might not be important to you as you do not gain 'salvation' from their deaths. In the case of Jesus of 'Nazareth', your belief of salvation is closely linked to his 'death'. Why am I not surprised you would ignore the persons who helped 'killed' him and sets the motion of 'remission of sins thorugh blood' in christianity?

2. According to you, those who planted the nails were ordered by their superiors and hence not directly responsible for Jesus 'death'. Interesting when we have a person who identified the person of Jesus was made a villain and died misearbly out of it (and a lesson we can learn from the episode), and we should not know what happened to the main persons who directly put nails on him and poke spear on him? In fact, you seemed to absolve the soldiers 'fault' as they were soldiers getting order from superiors. Interesting... very interesting.

Another question, was the crusifixion of Jesus satan's plan or God's plan?
If satan has nothing to do with this then those jewish clerics who are responsible of the murdering of Jesus did not do an evil thing, maybe they go heaven because of this

Psalm32 said:

I have a question. Why do you non Christians hang out in the Christian forums? Just curious......

Click to expand...

*bangs head on brick wall....


I'm sorry....please continue with the discussion at hand.

The bible narrates the role of Judas in identifying Jesus and led to his arrest, trial and crucifixion. Can I not say that Judas sets the whole process of crucifixion, resurrection and remission of sins. Technically speaking, was Judas not the 'agent of God' in fulfilling this belief?

Click to expand...

Hi. Coincentally, Judas also means Judah symbolic of not only the Tribe the Lord Jesus came from, but also the one that betrayed Him.

judas occurs 33 times in 32 verses:

Mat 26:14 Then 5119 one 1520 of the twelve 1427, called 3004 Judas [ioudaV <2455>] 2455 Iscariot 2469, went 4198 unto 4314 the chief priests 749,

Reve 5:5 But one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep. Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah [iouda <2448>], the Root of David, has prevailed to open the scroll and to loose its seven seals."

unfrancophone said:

What does this have to do with it? This is completely nonsensical to what I posted and frankly doesn't really make sense. Blood is used a lot in the Bible? Not a shocker and not really pertinent. The OP was WHY does God require blood, not WHERE IN THE BIBLE does it say he does?

Click to expand...

Probably because blood represents life. And our sin causes death.

AlHannah said:

Probably because blood represents life. And our sin causes death.

Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing that up. It immediately reminded me of this verse: Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

originally posted by Islam_mulia

The OP talks about the 'death' of Jeus on the cross and the shedding of blood to clear the sins of mankind. At least that's what Christians believe. My question was very relevant to the OP. Who, according to your bible, killed Jesus, that enabled the remission of sins? Was it the Jews, the Romnas or the Father himself?

Click to expand...

Exactlly which question(s) does it answer? Here are the questions again.

1. Couldn't God have forgiven mankind without Jesus dying on a cross?

2. Why did God have to have blood?

3. Is there anywhere in scripture that says Christ bore the wrath of God for mankind, and why?

Click to expand...

The question is not who killed Jesus.

The bible narrates the role of Judas in identifying Jesus and led to his arrest, trial and crucifixion. Can I not say that Judas sets the whole process of crucifixion, resurrection and remission of sins. Technically speaking, was Judas not the 'agent of God' in fulfilling this belief?

Click to expand...

To be technically correct, the only thing that Judas can get credit for is pointing out Jesus to the officials. What happened after that is no reflection upon Judas whatsoever. The answer to the second question is Yes, God allowed Judas's act to eventually lead to the crucifixion. It could have been done in some manner as well, I suppose.

1. Who killed the old prophets might not be important to you as you do not gain 'salvation' from their deaths. In the case of Jesus of 'Nazareth', your belief of salvation is closely linked to his 'death'.

Click to expand...

Again, this has no revelance to the OP. Details are not always important. If I knew who killed a certain person, it does not change the fact that the person was killed. Knowing that the person was killed is the crux of the issue. Knowing who would be revelant in determining the legal action to take to bring that person to justice and for the sake of the families involved, as well as society in general.

Why am I not surprised you would ignore the persons who helped 'killed' him and sets the motion of 'remission of sins thorugh blood' in christianity?

Click to expand...

You are making a fallacy by equationg Judas' act as the reaon for Jesus' death. You can only say that Judas' action lead to the arrest- nothing more. What happened after that is not Judas' responsibility. If I follow your reasoning to completion, you area saying that Judas' act is the reason for Jesus' death. That can not be assumed since many events transpired in between the first and last events. To agree with you would be to say that the trial itself was insignificant in determing what happened to Jesus. If that is the case, why have a trial?

2. According to you, those who planted the nails were ordered by their superiors and hence not directly responsible for Jesus 'death'. Interesting when we have a person who identified the person of Jesus was made a villain and died misearbly out of it (and a lesson we can learn from the episode), and we should not know what happened to the main persons who directly put nails on him and poke spear on him?

Click to expand...

Judas' death was out of his guilt bearing over him. He recognized that he did wrong in turning in Jesus. To reiterate what I am saying: those who put nails in Jesus are not responsible for Jesus' death. They followed orders given to them. That should not be hard to understand.

Also, to correct your portrayal of Judas: he was not made into a villain. He did the act that made himself that placed that label of villain upon himself.

In fact, you seemed to absolve the soldiers 'fault' as they were soldiers getting order from superiors. Interesting... very interesting.

Click to expand...

There is nothing interesting about it. It is rationally correct to say this. If they acted upon their own volition, then you have a point. According to your logic, all people that execute people held in prisons are the actual killers and not the governments that ask for their execution on some legal grounds. You are saying have no primary role in their being killed?

It's OK peaceful soul. You can put aside my questions if you are not comfortable answering them. I have not seen any Christians who made an effort to answer them anyway.... my understanding is that it could be an embrassment to Christians. To those who would like to answer: the main question was: Who killed Jesus - the Jews, the Romans or the Father.

Islam_mulia said:

It's OK peaceful soul. You can put aside my questions if you are not comfortable answering them. I have not seen any Christians who made an effort to answer them anyway.... my understanding is that it could be an embrassment to Christians. To those who would like to answer: the main question was: Who killed Jesus - the Jews, the Romans or the Father.

Click to expand...

According to some sects the Jews.
According to Christian Thinking everybody
According to the bible God.

Since it was God, then all people who were involved with the death of Jesus was only performing that which God willed them to do. Their was no Free Will involved since it was Gods Plan in the first place.

Islam_mulia said:

It's OK peaceful soul. You can put aside my questions if you are not comfortable answering them. I have not seen any Christians who made an effort to answer them anyway.... my understanding is that it could be an embrassment to Christians. To those who would like to answer: the main question was: Who killed Jesus - the Jews, the Romans or the Father.

Click to expand...

The Jewish leaders held the trial to find Jesus guilty of blasphemy (Matthew 27:1), and they eventually got Pontius Pilate to agree to have Jesus crucified. Pilate could have prevented Jesus's death, but he would have had a bigger problem on his hands -- Pilate washed his hands in their midst and declared he was innocent of the man's blood and the crowd accepted responsibility (Matthew 27:22-25). John 19:11 sums up the stance that Pilate's power was only his because it was God's will, and that the Jews were guilty of trying to get Jesus executed.

But it was God's will -- this was the purpose for which Jesus was born, the Word of God made flesh. Jesus's ministry greatly disturbed the leaders of the people (partly because he wasn't what they figured the Messiah would be, and partly because of the kinds of things he said) long before Judas turned Jesus over. Here's further "proof" that it was God's will: Jesus, who obeyed the Father in all things, accepted it. The Jewish people hadn't always wanted him dead: Jesus retreated from them when he knew they would try to make him their leader (John 6:14-15). Jesus submitted to the will of God, not the will of man; Jesus would not then have permitted himself to be whipped and crucified if it was not already the will of the Father.

I recall the words of Matthew 16:23: He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do."

So the Romans carried out the crucifixion, demanded by the Jews, according to God's will. And I think there was a chupacabra and the Easter Bunny in there somewhere, too.

Gott said:

According to some sects the Jews.
According to Christian Thinking everybody
According to the bible God.

Since it was God, then all people who were involved with the death of Jesus was only performing that which God willed them to do. Their was no Free Will involved since it was Gods Plan in the first place.

Click to expand...

I won't get into the "free will" discussion, since I doubt I can get you to accept that our free will and God's will can coincide and that God's foreknowledge does not necessary mean God has predestined something...

... but I will say that I didn't kill Jesus. You didn't kill him either. It's impossible that someone not born at the time of Jesus's death killed him. Perhaps you were thinking of the Christian answer to the question "who is responsible for Jesus's death?" (which is different from "who killed Jesus?").

In Catholic theology, since Jesus died for the sins of everyone, we were all complicit in his crucifixion. Jesus died because of my sins as much as he died for Yohanan Q. Pharisee's sins. It's what makes it possible for Jesus to be my Savior.

peaceful soul said:

originally posted by Gott

Well, that is always a possibility if we accept that God has power to do things above what we can discern. One thing the Bible shows is that God can not simply say "I forgive you" without there being some kind of judgment made to justify the act of forgiveness. Justification of sin is not trivial.

Why not? Is God forbidden to do that or not? If He is not, then your question is moot. Now, if you are trying to ask this question in a larger context, then you should state it as such.

We are not always privy to why God does this or not that instead. All we can do as Christians is to understand what He has revealed through the Bible. The very first act that we can trace to blood shedding is the covering of Adam and Eve with the skin of an animal. This act sets the tone for the entire message of the Bible from a Christian's perspective.

Covering of Adam and Eve shows two things:

1. God initiated the covering.
2. The covering came after they sinned.

From these two things we can safely conclude that blood shedding, when done in proper context of scripture, equates to atonement of man's sins. We can see that in other parts of the Bible, the same blood shedding accomplishes the same thing. Through the references given to us in the Bible and with God's leading, we can come to understand certain things about God.

I don't think so, but we can see in various places whereby we can discern that Jesus acted in this role. Here are a couple of passages to help you to see this.

Heb 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

Heb 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

Heb 9:17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Heb 9:18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

Heb 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

Heb 9:20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

Heb 9:21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Heb 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Heb 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

I hope this helps you to understand. Read the book of Hebrews for even more understanding of the subject at hand.

There need not be a single verse to enunciate an entire principle or concept from the Bible. It is with an open mind for us to read and to understand. Anyways, if you still have questions, then I will be more than glad to oblige.

Click to expand...

One thing the Bible shows is that God can not simply say "I forgive you" without there being some kind of judgment made to justify the act of forgiveness. Justification of sin is not trivial.

Click to expand...

Thats funny you say that, since humans forgive their own children out of love and not any kind of "Judgement to justify the act of forgiveness"
We do this because we are their parents, and as parents it is our duty as a parent to forgive our children out of love, not judgement.
If you have to judge whether or not to forgive your child or someone else then you haven't followed your own beliefs.

Why not? Is God forbidden to do that or not? If He is not, then your question is moot. Now, if you are trying to ask this question in a larger context, then you should state it as such.

Click to expand...

The reason is because evry tribal deity of the ancient world had a god who required the shedding of blood in order to forgive the peoples sin's, just as the tribal god of the israelites.
Why would the israelite god (who is supposed to be the true god) want to copy these "Gods who didn't exist"

Why would God have to have blood.

I don't think so

Click to expand...

In other words No.

japhy said:

I won't get into the "free will" discussion, since I doubt I can get you to accept that our free will and God's will can coincide and that God's foreknowledge does not necessary mean God has predestined something...

... but I will say that I didn't kill Jesus. You didn't kill him either. It's impossible that someone not born at the time of Jesus's death killed him. Perhaps you were thinking of the Christian answer to the question "who is responsible for Jesus's death?" (which is different from "who killed Jesus?").

In Catholic theology, since Jesus died for the sins of everyone, we were all complicit in his crucifixion. Jesus died because of my sins as much as he died for Yohanan Q. Pharisee's sins. It's what makes it possible for Jesus to be my Savior.

Click to expand...

we were all complicit in his crucifixion

Click to expand...

This is just what I stated aboput the Christian belief that we all killed Jesus.

" According to Christian Thinking everybody"

Islam_mulia said:

It's OK peaceful soul. You can put aside my questions if you are not comfortable answering them. I have not seen any Christians who made an effort to answer them anyway.... my understanding is that it could be an embrassment to Christians. To those who would like to answer: the main question was: Who killed Jesus - the Jews, the Romans or the Father.

Click to expand...

That question is not written into the OP; so, why would you insist that it was? Thanks for sidestepping the issue and trying to put the burden on Christians to answer a question that is not necessary in answering the OP. There is no natural embarassment in trying to be truthful in answering a question; so, please don't try to make an issue where there isn't one. If you don't want to stick to the OP, then I have nothing further to say concerning your question. If the question is brought up by the OP, then it is fair game. Again, I ask you, is your question one of the original questions of the OP? Was it later added to the OP? The answer is NO.

Gott said:

The reason is because evry tribal deity of the ancient world had a god who required the shedding of blood in order to forgive the peoples sin's, just as the tribal god of the israelites. Why would the israelite god (who is supposed to be the true god) want to copy these "Gods who didn't exist"

Click to expand...

As I said earlier, the first sacrifices recorded in the Bible are found before God "institutionalized" sacrifice; some of them are pre-historic, but most of them are done without God's commanding them.

The bigger question is why these numerous ancient tribes all had the same idea about blood sacrifices appeasing their gods. Where'd they get the idea? And why did some of them appease their gods with human blood, even infants' blood, whereas that practice was strictly prohibited by the God of Israelites?

Is it possible that the other tribes' sacrifices were copies of the "true" sacrifice preserved (or restored, even) in the Israelite tribe by God?

Gott said:

Just Three questions to ask of our fellow Christians.

1. Couldn't God have forgiven mankind without Jesus dying on a cross?

Click to expand...

Yes of course.

2. Why did God have to have blood?

Click to expand...

He didn't

3. Is there anywhere in scripture that says Christ bore the wrath of God for mankind, and why?

Click to expand...

None that I am aware of, at least none that state it in such a way.